|
Ok yeah I don't know where I was getting that from. Probably the fact that debate markets close immediately prior.
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 14:19 |
|
|
a cop posted:Ok yeah I don't know where I was getting that from. Probably the fact that debate markets close immediately prior. On some other sites, including ones people have used in years past, election markets could close when the polls open. Probably what you're thinking of.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
A Time To Chill posted:Also I did this last night: This actually isn't too bad a bet. It's a long shot but Iowa is notorious for weird results.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
I'm hoping the prices spike in the run-up to the actual caucusing so I can get some cruz no or hillary no at 25c or so. Otherwise, I might sit this round out for lack of fun choices.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
RUBIO.IACAUCUS16.GOP.2ND trading @ 20¢? Why would anyone pay 20¢ for a longshot like that? Spread it out among the 1¢ losers if you think Trump and/or Cruz will underperform that severely.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:RUBIO.IACAUCUS16.GOP.2ND trading @ 20¢? Good tip, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:RUBIO.IACAUCUS16.GOP.2ND trading @ 20¢? he saw a decent gain in yesterday's DMR poll, even if he was 15 points behind Trump. But still, momentum is everything, and with his "win" in last week's debate according to MSM, and all of the Cruz negatives recently, it's not hard to imagine him taking #2. Nate Silver laid out his four likely IA outcomes, and Rubio in #2 was one of them. Also, in the last two days, Cruz has started using his TV spending on anti-Rubio ads (instead of anti-trump, which he was doing before) - so the media read it as "is cruz suddenly afraid of slipping to 3rd place after the debate and DMR poll??" 20c isn't surprising given he's getting santorum surge hype, while all the 1c losers are totally flat in polls
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
Apparently Rubio did pretty well in day one of the poll and under-performed after that, so I wouldn't be so sure about momentum.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
thethreeman posted:he saw a decent gain in yesterday's DMR poll, even if he was 15 points behind Trump. But still, momentum is everything, and with his "win" in last week's debate according to MSM, and all of the Cruz negatives recently, it's not hard to imagine him taking #2. Nate Silver laid out his four likely IA outcomes, and Rubio in #2 was one of them. Also, in the last two days, Cruz has started using his TV spending on anti-Rubio ads (instead of anti-trump, which he was doing before) - so the media read it as "is cruz suddenly afraid of slipping to 3rd place after the debate and DMR poll??" Thanks for the context. I still think it’s a bad bet for the price, but you also won’t see me betting heavily against it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
I am just getting into this, and I am thinking about buying the No on Trump sweeping the first four states, then selling it off if he wins Iowa. Is this a viable strategy?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
furiouskoala posted:I am just getting into this, and I am thinking about buying the No on Trump sweeping the first four states, then selling it off if he wins Iowa. Is this a viable strategy?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
furiouskoala posted:I am just getting into this, and I am thinking about buying the No on Trump sweeping the first four states, then selling it off if he wins Iowa. Is this a viable strategy? If he wins Iowa convincingly the price will plummet almost to zero and you will have a lot of difficulty selling off your shares.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
Iowa market rules check. The three Iowa markets say:IACAUCUS16.GOP posted:The winner of the 2016 Republican Iowa caucuses shall be the candidate identified in the answer, according to the Iowa Republican Party. IACAUCUS16.GOP.2ND posted:The candidate winning the 2nd largest number of votes cast in the 2016 Iowa Republican caucuses shall be the candidate identified in the answer, according to the Iowa Republican Party. IACAUCUS16.DEM posted:The candidate receiving the greatest share of delegate support in the 2016 precinct-level Democratic Iowa caucuses shall be the candidate identified in the answer, according to Iowa Democratic Party. Maybe I'm reading into this a bit too much, but previously vague rules have affected the outcomes. For IACAUCUS16.GOP does the Republican Party declare the winner based on votes cast or delegates awarded? Interesting to see they are using the votes cast metric for GOP.2ND, and the DEM market uses delegate support. EDIT: Looks like in 2012, Rick Santorum was declared the winner based on votes cast, but didn't get any delegates. So the two Republican markets are based on votes cast while the DEM market is by delegate count. Interesting. Anyone disagree? huge pile of hamburger has issued a correction as of 00:04 on Feb 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
People getting jitters just before caucus day on the TRUMP.IOWA.YES market. What a bunch of pansies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
furiouskoala posted:I am just getting into this, and I am thinking about buying the No on Trump sweeping the first four states, then selling it off if he wins Iowa. Is this a viable strategy? I'm not going to do this to any large degree because it will involve selling too much stuff, but you could do an arbitrage where you bet that Trump will both sweep the first 4 states and also bet that he will come in second. The first is trading 50/50 and you can get the second for 25 cents. If he doesn't win he is all but certain to come in 2nd. (coming in 3rd or worse is the only way this bet fails) If he does win Iowa, the value of the sweep will shoot up to about 95 cents.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
Gibberish posted:People getting jitters just before caucus day on the TRUMP.IOWA.YES market. What a bunch of pansies. Fine by me, it lets me squeeze in some last minute shares at a cheaper price.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Thanks for the context. I still think it’s a bad bet for the price, but you also won’t see me betting heavily against it. yeah I agree. Actually just checked out the RCP graphs to compare, and you can def see some santorum in rubio's line here. But the field is just sooo much more crowded this year 2016:  And 2012: 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 01:46
|
|
|
A Time To Chill posted:Everyone post your Iowa bets! I'll go first so you can laugh at my failure.  glglgl
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
Lol I'd cancel those Rubio.yes offers. If Rubio starts to look as though he might have a chance, those orders will never fill. If it starts to look hopeless, they will fill even at 1c.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
Too lazy to screenshot but I bought 500 shares of Hillary No in Iowa at 32c a pop for fun. Go Bernie!
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
I think it's more fun to win bets
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
Aliquid posted:I think it's more fun to win bets Winning a sub-50% return on a close race is a lot less fun than winning a 200% return, basically.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 02:38
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Winning a sub-50% return on a close race is a lot less fun than winning a 200% return, basically. Yeah this. I prefer gambling to investing on PI imho.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 03:21
|
|
|
A Time To Chill posted:Yeah this. I prefer gambling to investing on PI imho. Have you considered purchasing "Democrats retake Congress"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 03:38
|
|
|
Gibberish posted:People getting jitters just before caucus day on the TRUMP.IOWA.YES market. What a bunch of pansies. To be fair he's just outside the margin of error I'd be jittery too. Arkane posted:
Yeah I'd cancel those offers if I were you. They're dangerous to play with if you're new to the site.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 03:41
|
|
|
If one were to assume that Cruz will outperform in rural areas and in the western part of the state with more evangelicals and Trump would do better in the cities and further east, what vote would be reported first? I'm guessing the small towns, which would mean that if the first results came in tied, Trump would probably pull it out. The other factor is the snow. Would it be fair to say that it will be starting later in the evening and would thus be a non-issue for a place used to winter weather?  My Iowa picks. I am going under the reasoning that a Trump #2 is the same thing as a Cruz win. Zeta Taskforce has issued a correction as of 03:56 on Feb 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 03:52
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:The other factor is the snow. Would it be fair to say that it will be starting later in the evening and would thus be a non-issue for a place used to winter weather? Yeah it's shaping up to not be a problem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Have you considered purchasing "Democrats retake Congress"? Link it. If it's undervalued, then maybe. Though tbh the earliest they might possibly pull that off is 2020.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
Dropout market is on the fritz tonight. Fiorina at 75, Carson at 69... Apparently Santorum told the press today he's in until at least SC. I haven't read the article yet though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 04:40
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:Winning a sub-50% return on a close race is a lot less fun than winning a 200% return, basically. Until you lose all your money thanks to statistical probability The constant grinding of sure bets and small return flipping is the way to do it, of course yes it is more fun to throw it on a long shot and multiply your winnings
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 04:49
|
|
|
Peachstapler posted:Dropout market is on the fritz tonight. Fiorina at 75, Carson at 69... that market is real, real dumb there should be a market for each of them with a set date, will X drop out before Y date?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 04:52
|
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:Until you lose all your money thanks to TRUMP
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
 lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 07:57
|
|
|
Gibberish posted:People getting jitters just before caucus day on the TRUMP.IOWA.YES market. What a bunch of pansies. wow trumpsweep crashing from mid/upper 50s the last few days to low 40s in the last three hours. Good time to get in or out, given there's been no corresponding collapse in trump's IA shares 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 08:26
|
|
|
People hoping for two flukes in two elections probably are betting on the wrong market
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 08:39
|
|
|
People buying up Rubio Yes pretty high for Iowa. 10c for first place and 20c for second place right now, both of which seem overweight. Edit: Rubio 2nd now hitting 23c for yes (bought no @ 77c). Vox Nihili has issued a correction as of 09:09 on Feb 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 08:57
|
|
|
thethreeman posted:wow trumpsweep crashing from mid/upper 50s the last few days to low 40s in the last three hours. Good time to get in or out, given there's been no corresponding collapse in trump's IA shares there has been a pretty severe drop in Trump.Iowa shares, it's down to 61 from 72. Still, thanks for the tip, gonna buy some more SWEEP
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 09:36
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 11:18
|
|
|
You're about to lose a whole lot of money I can respect that tho
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 12:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 14:19 |
|
|
Yeah I'd sell the GOP shares asap while you're still ahead.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 13:08
|
|